Non-newtonian surface viscosity

Joly, M.

doi:10.1016/0095-8522(56)90168-4

Cited by 30 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The quantity (2Vs + 3vB) has been calculated for several dilute emulsions (Nawab & Mason, 1958) and found to be within the range 0.92 x to 0.014 x g sec-l. These values are about the same as values of Vs reported for films of surface-active agents spread at an air-water interface (Joly, 1956), although the two sets of data are not strictly comparable. Other emulsions which did not obey eqn 19 were found to follow eqn 17 provided the emulsifier layer did not inhibit fluid circulation within the particles.…”

Section: Internal Phasesupporting

confidence: 71%

The flow properties of emulsions

Sherman¹

1964

Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Internal Phasesupporting

confidence: 71%

The flow properties of emulsions

Sherman¹

1964

Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There have been a variety of devices developed over the years to measure the viscoelastic parameters of Langmuir films 5, 8,9,[11][12][13]17,18,25,44,51 . The most commonly used viscometers rely on inducing monolayer flow through a channel; however, the flow in the channel is generated by a surface pressure gradient, creating an ambiguity in the surface pressure or molecular area corresponding to the surface viscosity, which makes measurements near phase transitions problematic 14,15 .…”

Section: The Magnetic Needle Surface Viscometermentioning

confidence: 99%

A Brief Review of the Relationships between Monolayer Viscosity, Phase Behavior, Surface Pressure, and Temperature Using a Simple Monolayer Viscometer

Alonso

Zasadzinski

2006

J. Phys. Chem. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The two-dimensional surface shear viscosity, eta, of fatty acid monolayers of different chain lengths, measured using a simple magnetic needle viscometer, strongly correlates with the molecular organization in condensed phases and the absolute temperature. eta can increase by orders of magnitude at phase boundaries associated with tilted to untilted molecular order, providing the underlying order is semicrystalline. Hence, untilted, long-range ordered CS phases are the most viscous films. However, despite being untilted, the LS rotator phase is less viscous than certain laterally ordered tilted phases, suggesting a decrease of the van der Waals interactions due to molecular rotation. In certain regions of the L2 phase, eta reaches a maximum before the L2-LS transition, an anomalous behavior correlated with the change in the lattice symmetry of the headgroup. Surface shear viscosity, even when measured with a macroscopic probe, is particularly sensitive to the microscopic organization of monolayers.

show abstract

“…The energy dissipated increases with the rate of shearing and is distinct from but analogous to the dissipation by ordinary viscosity in three-dimensional fluids. In many systems containing surfaceactive agents this surface shear viscosity is large and easily measured (9).…”

Section: Dynamic Interfacial Tensionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interfacial turbulence: Hydrodynamic instability and the marangoni effect

1959

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The origin of interfacial turbulence, spontaneous agitation of the interface between two unequilibrated liquids, has been explained in terms of classical flow, diffusion, and surface processes. The essence of the explanation is the long-known though much neglected Marangoni effect, wherein movement in an interface is caused by longitudinal variations of interfacial tension. It is proposed that interfacial turbulence is a manifestation of hydrodynamic instability, which is touched off by ever present, small, random fluctuations about the interface.A simplified mathematical model has been analyzed in order to detail the mechanism of the "interfacial engine" which supplies the mechanical energy of interfacial turbulence.In its present form the analysis incorporates several drastic simplifications, though ways of removing some of these have been suggested. The groundwork has been laid for the more elaborate analyses that are needed for a decisive test of the theory.The analysis shows how some systems may be stable with solute transfer in one direction yet unstable with transfer in the opposite direction, a striking result. It also suggests that interfacial turbulence is usually promoted by (1) solute transfer out of the phase of higher viscosity, (2) solute transfer out of the phase in which its diffusivity is lower, (3) large differences in kinematic viscosity and solute diffusivity between the two phases, (4) steep concentration gradients near the interface, (5) interfacial tension highly sensitive to solute concentration, (6) low viscosities and diffusivities in both phases, (7) absence of surfaceactive agents, and (8) interfaces of large extent.That some of these effects have been observed in the laboratory lends credence to the theory.

show abstract

Non-newtonian surface viscosity

Cited by 30 publications

References 15 publications

The flow properties of emulsions

The flow properties of emulsions

A Brief Review of the Relationships between Monolayer Viscosity, Phase Behavior, Surface Pressure, and Temperature Using a Simple Monolayer Viscometer

Interfacial turbulence: Hydrodynamic instability and the marangoni effect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About